K

Wildernesse:

Wow, I'd say you're spouting some borderline atheistic ideas there! You've basically allowed for an entire system of morality without a basis in God. Just carry the biological drives to their natural conclusion (no free will) and you might soon be arguing from the other side.

This isn't meant to be a slam or a question of your conviction. It just sounds a lot like the one of the last steps I went through before giving up theism.

HelenM

Originally posted by K:

My guess is that there won't be a lot of Christians taking a crack at this one.

Well, that's because you posted it on the Secular Web. Not surprisingly, there aren't many Christians here. Lack of responses is going to have everything to do with lack of Christian posters and doesn't necessarily indicate that you've come up with a really tricky question/dilemma for them.

This is one of those situations that follows logically from Christian teachings, but is almost universally abhorrent.

No, it doesn't follow logically at all. Did you forget about the so-called Ten Commandments - "you shall not kill" is one of them. And going back earlier in the Bible, Noah is told by God that any human who takes the life of another is to forfeit his own life as punishment.

And going back before that God warns Cain not to kill Abel and Cain is punished when he does so anyway.

So, it's quite clear in the Bible that humans are not to take the life of other humans - except if it's punishment.

There's not one hint in the whole of the Bible that killing people (or children) so they will go to heaven could ever be acceptable or pleasing to God.

Helen

K

HelenM:

But I didn't say that the person was killing to go to Heaven. In fact the person was doing the ultimate selfless act - choosing eternal punishment in order that others could live in eternal bliss. This would be an even greater love than to lay down one's life for ones friends. It would be laying down one's eternal afterlife for strangers. The result follows from two ideas:

1. Children who die before the age of reason go to Heaven.

2. Sacrificing one's own comfort to save another is good.

Knowingly enduring an eternity of torture to save others would blow Jesus' sacrifice out of the water.

Your point about the lack of Christians here is well taken. The lack of responses doesn't reflect at all what would be expected if I posted on a Christian site. I stand corrected.

I guess I wouldn't post this in a Christian area because I would risk offending a lot of people. I figure if they come here, they're fair game.

If some of the Christians here would be willing post something similar in a Christian thread (in a way that wouldn't be offensive), I'd be interested in hearing the responses.

HelenM

I understood that you meant killing not to get oneself to heaven, but others...

But still, if the Bible says "Do not kill" no amount of rationalizing that "it's for a good cause" can undo that it's wrong, as far as a Bible-believing Christian's concerned.

It would not be a logical response of a Bible-believing Christian to say "Even though the Bible explicitly forbids this, I can see a reason to do it..."

Some Christian boards don't allow non-Christians to post on them. But if you can find one where it's ok (I think it's ok on <a href="http://www.christianforums.com/index.php?s=" target="_blank">Christian Forums</a> in some forums) then I'd say go for it - ask the question if you want to, and see what they say...let them tell you whether it's offensively presented...

But maybe this is bad advice

Helen

Wyz_sub10

I don't know, Helen. God seems to suspend that rule in the Old Testament an aaaaaaaaawful lot!

There's no end of praise dolled out to those who kill entire nations - man, woman and child. "Though shalt not kill, except..." seems to be the real message.

Nothing personal, but I have a hard time with the "pick-and-choose" mentality associated with bible teachings.

It's that conundrum that makes questions like K's truly difficult to answer, and the answers, truly difficult to defend.

wildernesse

K:

I don't consider what you said a slam. I am a Christian and don't think that I'll be giving up my faith anytime soon. I don't see how people can agree that non-believers act morally and have generally moral societies and yet that Christianity holds the standard for morality.

And Amos hit the nail on the head--I do have a degree in Anthropology.

Of course, I agree with Helen that God doesn't want us to kill children, or anyone for that matter and makes it clear in the Bible. But there are lots of times when we rationalize our bad deeds away for good causes--stealing bread for our starving family, doing something to save people from Nazis, you know all the usual "is it wrong when" situations. The reasons these questions come up is because our morality isn't absolute.

--tibac

Amos

Good for you and may I remind you that Margareth Mead had 20 of them and was still wrong.

K

wildernesse:

I think you're saying that morality is situation specific (i.e. the Ten Commandments are not the last word in what is sinful - every act has to be judged based on the situation). Is this accurate?

If so, I have to say that it is refreshing to speak with a Christian who doesn't believe that there is an absolute moral code based on the nature of God.

Jobar

Amos:
"Limbo is when a person dies and has only been exposed to its own lymbic system for orientation."

So, Limbo has something to do with the limbic (lymphic?) system?

Gee! *I* didn't know that!

Um, does this mean that if one dies while being purged with a laxative, it increases the chance of going to Purgatory???



[ September 09, 2002: Message edited by: Jobar ]</p>

Mark_Chid

As any Jew will tell you, the Hebrew word used means MURDER, not kill.

Hence the commandment is 'Though shalt not kill outside of the bounds of the law.'

Hence war, judicial execution and any death caused at God's command is not forbidden.

I'm an atheist, but I will grant that when properly translated, this commandment is consistent with the rest of the OT.